SOME  ABBREVIATIONS 
UNRECOGNIZED 

OR  MISUNDERSTOOD 
IN   THE  TEXT   OF   THE 

JERUSALEM  TALMUD 

BY 

PROFESSOR  LOUIS  GINZBERG 


Reprinted    by    courtesy    of    the    General    Publication 

Committee   of    the  Students'  Annual  of    the 

Jewish  Theological  Seminary  of  America 

New  York,   1914 


Page  140,  line  z,  snouia  read:  nabenm. 
Note  8  should  read:  Lichtenberg. 
Note  11,  last  line,  should  read:  Azkari. 

Page  141,  lines  6  and  10;  page  142,  lines  2  and  4,  should  read:  JO'D 

Line  13  should  read:   Nrvniso 

Note  12  should  read:  Comp.  note  3. 
Page  142,  line  3,  should  read:  19^  ]2='i;  n'DT=l"' 

Line  19  should  read:  explain  that  difficult. 
Page  143,  line  12,  should  read:  may  '«  .i"a 

Page  145,  note  31,  line  3,  should  read:  Yebamoth  (instead  of  Y.). 

Line  10  should  read:  n:n(« } 

Note  33,  line  11,  should  read:  Nissim. 
Page  148,  line  2,  should  read:  OOD»D 
Page  150,  note  47,  line  8,  should  read:  Septuagint. 


SOME  ABBREVIATIONS 
UNRECOGNIZED 

OR  MISUNDERSTOOD 
IN   THE  TEXT   OF   THE 

JERUSALEM  TALMUD 

BY 

PROFESSOR  LOUIS  GINZBERG 


Reprinted    by    courtesy    of    tbe    General    Publication 

Committee    or    the   Students    Annual   or    the 

Jewish  Theological  Seminary  or  America 

New  York,   1914 


SOME  ABBREVIATIONS,  UNRECOGNIZED 

OR  MISUNDERSTOOD,  IN  THE  TEXT 

OF  THE  JERUSALEM  TALMUD 

BY    PllOF.    LOUIS   GlNZBEKG 

THE  numerous  abbreviations  in  Rabbinic  literature  are  ver- 
itable pitfalls  laid  for  the  student  by  the  scribe.  In  most 
cases,  however,  they  are  not  of  a  very  dangerous  nature.  The 
student  who  is  at  home  in  this  literature  will  not  be  easily  caught 
by  them.  If  he  is  master  of  his  subject  he  will  be  able  to  tell  by 
the  context  whether  the  abbreviation  3"n  stands  for  NHJ  "in 
"one  goat"  or  for  !»nj  D3H  "great  scholar,"  and  there  is  hardly 
any  fear  that  he  would  read  the  abbreviation  3"3  as  12  ^3  "universal 
genius,"  where  it  is  meant  to  stand  for  ip'JD  1B13  "atheist." 

Paradoxically  as  it  may  sound,  it  is  nevertheless  true  that  the 
scribe  who  discarded  abbreviations  caused  more  difficulties  than  he 
who  made  free  use  of  them.  In  their  attempt  to  improve  upon 
the  text  before  them,  the  scribes  tried  to  explain  the  abbreviations 
by  writing  them  out  in  full,  but  as  penmanship  is  rarely  combined 
with  learning,  they  very  often  failed  miserably.  Many  a  corrupt 
text  is  the  result  of  this  kind  of  "scribal  criticism,"  and  the  less 
authoritative  a  book  was,  the  more  was  its  text  exposed  to  the 
whims  of  the  scribe. 

The  Babylonian  Talmud,  being  the  sole  source  of  Rabbinic  law 
and  the  standard  work  of  study,  was  carefully  watched  over  by  the 
scholars,  and  its  text  is  therefore  comparatively  free  from  scribal 
emendations,  while  the  Jerusalem  Talmud  and  the  Midrashim, 
which  never  were  considered  authoritative  works,  and  the  study 
of  which  was  limited  to  a  few  specialists,  suffered  greatly  at  the 
hands  of  the  scribe.  The  great  acumen  and  vast  erudition  of  the 
commentators  of  the  Yerushalmi  were  not  infrequently  a  hindrance 
to  them,  since  by  these  qualities  they  were  tempted  to  retain  the 
most  absurd  errors  committed  by  the  scribe. 

In  the  following  I  give  a  few  interesting  examples  of  unrecog- 
nized or  misunderstood  abbreviations  in  the  Yerushalmi  which  I 

138 


ABBREVIATIONS  IN  THE  JERUSALEM   TALMUD          139 

hope  will  bring  home  to  the  student  the  great  importance  of  textual 
criticism.  The  fact  established  in  this  investigation  that  the  Yeru- 
shalmi,  or  at  least  some  versions  of  it,1  made  use  of  mnemonic  signs 
D^D'D  will  help  to  reconstrue  many  a  corrupt  passage  in  that  text. 

I.     Yerushalmi  Berakot  v;  9a,  contains  a  number  of  stories 
whose  purport  it  is  to  teach  the  truth2  that  holy  and  saintly  men  are 
recognized  as  such  by  the  "features  of  their  faces."    Among  others 
we  read  the  following  narrative : 
pni?  'DK   .fira  ^xcn  in  jinon  (3  po^oxa  p!>«oo  nn  jrur 
.njnf>  u^V  r*   (4   nnan   -IK-ID   i^ax   po« 

If  we  disregard  the  word  njn?  this  passage  does  not  offer  any 
difficulty  whatsoever;  it  tells  the  following  story:  "Rabbi  Yanai 
and  R.  Jonathan  were  walking  in  the  street;  a  man  saw  them  and 
greeted  them  with  the  words:  "Peace  unto  you,  masters."5  They 
replied,  "We  have  not  even  the  looks  of  Haberim  (fellows) ."  The 
man  in  the  street  only  by  glancing  at  the  Rabbis  knew  that  he  has 
great  men  before  him.  They,  however,  as  truly  great  men,  humbly 


1  MS.  Genizah  and  MS.  Rome  do  not  read  the  mnemonic  sign 
in  Berak.  V,  9b;  compare  below  paragraph  I. 

1  This  view  is  based  on  Deut.  xxviii,  10,  "and  all  people  shall  see  that 
Thou  art  called  by  the  name  of  the  Lord." 

•MS.  Rome  in  my  Yerushalmi  Fragments,  p.  350,  has  JWDN3,  Yalkut 
Shimeoni  ibid,  p.  322  N»B1BD»JO,  while  MS.  Genizah  ibid,  p.  17  and  Ibn  Gama 
in  his  Addenda  to  Aruk  (edited  by  Buber  in  Graetz-Jubelschrift,  p.  28,  read 
pBDJO,  which,  however,  is  not  crrooW  but a  copist's  error  for  pBDlO^'BnBDNa 
''streets."  Buber  did  not  notice  that  the  alphabetical  order  of  Ibn  Gamas 
book  makes  this  emendation  necessary.  All  these  readings  go  to  show  that 
paSox  of  the  printed  text  of  the  Yer.  is  only  orthographically  different 
from  ptaiDNj  "streets"  ( Yer.  Yebam  XII,  2d :  ]B1DN  ) ,  if  one  does  not 
prefer  to  correct  it  in  J'BIDX  as  MS.  R.  has  it.  Musafias  derivation  of 
1'oSoN  from  Latin  Saltus  "forest"  is  impossible  for  more  than  one  reason, 
while  Serillos  emendation  ( ? )  pD^BX  =  KaraXvo-L?  is  unnecessary  and  im- 
probable. 

4  Yalkut  1.  c.  and  Ibn  Gama  1.  c.  read  mnan,  and  it  is  this  faulty 
reading  which  R.  Elazar  Azkari,  in  his  commentary  ad  loc.  tries  in  vain  to 
explain. 

6  K«ai,  also  spelled  n'31,  is  rarely  though  regularly  used  as  plural  of 
toi,  "master,"  the  form  commonly  used  is  N"32l  in  the  sense  of  teacher  or 
master. 


2092475 


140  STUDENTS'  ANNUAL 

remarked  that  they  ought  not  to  have  been  taken  even  for 
Haberini6  (fellows),  still  less  for  Eabbaya7  (masters).  The 
words  of  Nachmanides,  W*?V  PK  nmn  mm  "6'SK  ...neon  'nick  &6, 
"I  have  not  acquired  wisdom  ...  we  do  not  possess  the  qualifica- 
tion of  a  Haber,"8  go  undoubtedly  back  to  our  passage  and  show 
how  this  great  Talmudist  understood  it.  Estori  Parhi  in  his  work 
rnBI  insn  xilv,  410  ed  pr.  =  611  ed.  Luncz  quotes  our  Yeru- 
shalmi  passage  as  follows:9  '31  ^  pp  Jirw  ^  f^  ro^n  mm, 
"I  do  not  possess  the  qualification  of  a  Haber  and  you  call  me 
Babbi." 

It  is  true  neither  Nachmanides  nor  Estori  Parhi  read  njn!> 
at  the  end  of  our  passage,  agreeing  therein  with  MS.  Genizah  and 
MS.  Borne  in  my  Yerushalmi  Fragments,  pp.  17  and  350  respective- 
ly, and  have  therefore  no  difficulty  in  explaining  it  correctly.10  But  it 
is  a  methodological  error  of  the  commentators11  to  distort  the  obvious 
meaning  of  a  passage  on  account  of  one  obscure  word.  Yet  it 


•Ed.  pr.  nvi3n=nn»3n  of  MS.  Genizah  and  MS.  Rome.  The  abstract 
nnan  stands  here  as  in  many  other  places  for  the  concrete  inn.  In  the  phil- 
osophical terminology  iNin  is  "quality"  and  Milan  iKin  might  be  translated 
as  "the  quality  of  a  Haber."  I  do  not  believe,  however  that  this  use  of 
•Win  is  older  than  the  Arabic  period;  Sectaries  ed.  Schechter  14,  11  Tiro  is 
"according  to  his  order"  and  not  "corresponding  to  his  quality." 

7  The  Haber  is  far  below  the  Rabbi ;  comp.  Kid.  33  b.  where   D»Dn='31 
is  described  as  superior  to  the  Haber. 

8  Comp.  II  Som.  vii,  19,    DINS!  filtfi,    "manner  of  man."    The  quotation 
is  from  Nahmanides'  famous  letter  published  in  the  collection  niKJp  A*i2K 
ed.  Lichtenstein  8a. 

'  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  author  refers  to  our  passage,  although 
his  reading  of  the  same  is  different  from  ours.  It  seems  that  he  read 

as  follows:  nbv  rvb  'ON  in  rvnon  pe&DMa  ^»ao  mn  [?p3V  12]  nain  "i 
,»n  "h  jnp  pnNi  »a  \>»  nnsn  min  iS'BN  'DK  .'m  ~]h.  It  is,  however,  possible 
that  the  last  four  words  are  not  those  of  the  Yer.  but  of  Estori  Parhi. 

10  Nor  has  it  Serillo,  but  with  this  author  we  are  never  sure  whether 
we  have  before  us  an  emendation  or  a  different  reading. 

11  It  would  be  useless   to  quote  all   "the  explanations"  given   by   the 
commentators;  but  it  is  worth  while  mentioning  that  the  one  found  in  the 
so-called  critical  commentary  by  Luncz  is  the  most  ridiculous  of  all.     By 
the  way,  neither  Ratner  nor  Luncz  refer  to  the  readings  of  the  Yer.  found 
in  Nachmanides,  Parhi,  Azkara  and  Yalkut. 


ABBREVIATIONS   IN  THE   JERUSALEM   TALMUD  141 

would  be  equally  uncritical  to  ignore  njn?,  which  is  found  not  only 
in  the  first  edition  of  the  Yerushalmi  but  also  in  Yalkut  Shimeoni 
and  was  read  also  by  Ibn  Gama.12 

The  puzzling  njrp  can  easily  be  explained,  if  we  read  with  ed. 
Amsterdam13  and  E.  Samuel  Yafeh  Ashkenazi14  njnf>  and  take  it 
as  mnemonic  sign  pD  to  indicate  the  names  of  the  authorities 
mentioned  in  the  following  paragraph  of  the  Yerushalmi.  The 
same  contains  stories  out  of  the  lives  of  K.  Lakish,  E.  Yudan  and 
E.  Elazar,  which  illustrate  their  great  devotion  to  study.15  If  the 
scribes  would  have  marked  HJTP  as  a  pD  there  would  not  have  been 
much  difficulty  to  explain  it.16  '?  stands  for  K^P? ;  'T  for  H1' ;  "9 
for  "ifV^K  and  'n  for  MH»  "studying"  (the  phrase  used  of  these  three 
scholars  is  po  Kn'Visa  'JHD  "very  studious"),  but  through 
negligence  or  ignorance  the  strokes  over  njn?  marking  it  as  a 
mnemonic  sign  dropped  out  and  the  commentators  spend  their 
acumen  in  explaining  a  copyist's  error. 

II.  Peah  iv,  18b :  '«i  pnr  "n  war£  ITJ^K  <n  KTJH  "\  nos 
Here  again  we  have  a  passage  which  the  commentators  could  not 
explain,  because  they  fail  to  see  that  VT2n?  or  1T2r6  as  ed.  Constan- 
tinople reads  is  a  mnemonic  sign.  The  Yerushalmi  mentions  five17 
authorities,  all  of  whom  hold  the  same  opinion  concerning  a 
certain  law  of  agency  discussed  in  this  passage.  These  Amoraim 


"Comp.  Note  1. 

13  The  critical   value  of  this   edition  is  by   far  greater   than   Frankel 
p.  141,  is  willing  to  admit. 

14  In  the  text  of  his  work  D'J'J?  fiB»  he  printed    njnS  but  in  his  com- 
mentary he  explains   it   as   if   he   read    njnS.     Ed.   Krakau   has   likewise 
f\y*f?,   but   as   this    edition   is   based   exclusively    on   the   first    edition,    its 
readings  have  no  independent  value. 

13  The  text  of  the  editions  is  incomplete.  The  story  concerning  R. 
Elazar  dropped  out,  in  the  same,  due  to  a  homoioteleuton,  but  both 
MSS.  in  my  Yer.  Fragments  have  preserved  the  original  text  Comp.  also 
ibid  p.  322  the  reading  of  Yalkut. 

"There  is  no  fixed  rule  which  letter  of  the  abbreviated  word  is  to  be 
represented  in  the  p>D;  Comp.  Sanh.  6b:  B>"niD,  where  'D='DV  /1=1Ty»t?K 
'O=TND  and  'B^jntPin'-  Prefixes  are  often  disregarded  in  the  p'D  and 
therefore  in  our  passage  'n=unD. 

17  The  Talmud  mentions  explicitly  only  three  older  Amoraim,  R.  Elazar, 
R.  Yohanan  and  R.  Joshua  b.  Levi,  because  the  later  authorities,  R. 
Jeremiah  and  R.  Yose,  reflect  the  opinion  of  the  former  ones,  which  they 
try  to  explain. 


142  STUDENTS'  ANTSTUAL 

are  :  E.  Elazar,  E.  Johanan,  E.  Joshua  ben  Levi,  E.  Jeremiah  and 
E.  Yose.18  The  pD  is  to  be  read  as  follows:  in&N='i>;  pnv  =  'n; 
•TDT  =  1""  ;(19  hi>)  P  =  '2  and  'V='DV.  It  is  very  probable  that 
the  use  of  (20war6  as  pD  was  suggested  by  the  subject  matter  dealt 
with  by  these  Amoraim  who  dispute  the  principle  l*V  3  n  i>  rot  DIN 


It  would,  however,  be  uncritical  to  accept  the  reading  of  MS. 
Eome  as  the  correct  one  and  in  this  way  ignore  the  difficulty 
caused  by20  wan^.  It  can  be  easily  shown  that  the  reading  of  MS. 
Eome  is  only  an  emendation  and,  clever  as  it  is,  it  does  not 
represent  the  original  text.21  It  reads 

mr   DIN   -ITJJ!>  Vpa    NTJN  "i 
jnenrp   ,11  pnr   "11  n?vi?   *an 

Now,  the  phrase  of  the  legal  principle  discussed  in  our  passage 
occurs  three  times  here  and  once  in  Baba  Mezia,  II,  8a,  but 
in  all  these  places  it  reads  HN^X»a  1T3r6  JlDT  DIN  and  not 
war6  nN'¥»a  nat  DIN  as  MS.  Rome  has  it.  We  see  by  it  that 
this  reading  cannot  be  the  original  one,  and  is  only  an  attempt  to 
expain  that  difficut  VTir6  by  adding  the  words  njnfloa  naT  DTK 
before  it,  but  it  betrays  itself  as  an  emendation  by  its  phraseology 
which  is  not  that  of  the  Yerushalmi.22 

III.     Pesahim.    IV,    30c  =  Taanit    IV,    67d:     njmNi  D'W 

frx.     I    have    already    in    another 


"In  Peah  our  texts  read  mv  "\,  but  in  the  parallel  passage  Maaser 
Sheni,  v.  56c,  the  correct  reading  rt'QT  '1  is  found.  The  Palestinians, 
R.  Jonah  and  R.  Yose,  are  often  mentioned  together  and  the  scribes  read 
therefore  the  abbreviation  <"i  as  nai'  '1  instead  of  rpDli  "i,  although  in 
our  passage,  not  the  Palestinian  R.  Yose  is  referred  to  but  his  Babylonian 
namesake,  the  colleague  of  R.  Jeremiah,  comp.  Shabbat  I,  3a,  and  Pes.  II, 
28c.  It  is  quite  probable  that  this  p'D  is  intended  to  call  attention  to 
the  difference  between  Peah  and  Maas.  Sh.  concerning  the  names  of  these 
Amoraim. 

19  It  is  not  always  the  name  of  the  author  that  is  represented  in  a 
JO'D,  sometimes  the  author's  father  takes  his  place;   comp.  B.  Batra  74b: 
D"JT  where  's=h*<htM  p  |1J?DB>   "i. 

20  1  think  that  the  correct  reading  of  the  ]»'D  is    '1'nnS,  the  last  letter 
stands  for  <DV 

21  This  was  entirely  overlooked  by  Luncz  in  his  commentary  ad  loc. 
"Babli    B.    Mezia    lOa:   n»sn  nap  vranS  n«»S»  n'3Jan.    Our  emendator, 

who   certainly  was   more   at   home   in  Babli   than   in   Yer.,   did  not  find 
fault  with  his  emended  text  on  account  of  its  similarity  to  that  of  Babli. 


ABBREVIATIONS  IN   THE   JERUSALEM   TALMUD          143 

place28  called  attention  to  this  very  strange  statement,  according 
to  which  the  body  of  delegates  representing  one  of  the  twenty-four 
divisions  at  the  service  in  the  Temple  consisted  of  twenty-four 
thousand  men!24  I  may  add  here  that  also  the  wording  of  our 
text  is  very  strange;  one  would  expect  to  have  the  text  read 
f£x  T'a  *?v  rrn  D^ETTD  nicy  instead  of  *ii»y  ^N  nyn-iKi  anvy 
D^BTPD,  which  is  very  misleading,  as  it  might  be  understood  to  say 
that  twenty-four  thousand  delegations  came  from  Jerusalem!  All 
these  difficulties  disappear  if  we  assume  that  vK  owes  its  existence 
to  the  faulty  reading  of  an  abbreviation.  The  Baraita  spoke  of  "the 
twenty-four  delegations,  one  of  which  came  from  Jerusalem": 
35)  IIVTD  nicy  ntm  D^BTVD  nicy  .Ya.  A  scribe  read  '«  as 
26)  *]7K  "thousand"  and  as  the  absurdity  of  thousand  delegations 
was  obvious  even  to  a  scribe,  the  emendation  c!?t?WD  IIDy  t)ta  1*3 
becafhe  necessary.27 

IV.  Eetubot  IV,  28d :  f>Nis^  b  tt  rfoj  ^Kit^a  r&u  rmw  "3 
•r^nii  p  torr  fcnv  n'jn  D^-m  wia*  .rpax  rrn  mj£  Mat? 
For  the  correct  understanding  of  this  extremely  difficult  passage 


"  Comp.  my  note  in  Ratner's  'vwi  JTS  MilK  Pesahim,  p.  55. 

**It  is  not  quite  clear  whether  the  delegation  of  the  priests  is  referred 
to  or  that  of  the  three  estates,  Priests,  Levites  and  Israelites. 

35  One  understands  now  the  relation  between  the  two  parts  of  the 
Baraita.  Jerusalem  was  represented  by  a  complete  delegation  11DJ7,  while 
the  next  largest  city  of  Palestine,  Jericho,  only  by  a  half  of  an  moj?.  This, 
the  Baraita  remarks,  was  done  not  because  the  population  of  Jericho  was 
not  large  enough,  but  to  emphasize  the  superiority  of  Jerusalem  over  all 
other  cities.  I  venture  to  suggest  that  the  Baraita,  Babli  Taanit,  27a,  is 
essentially  identical  with  our  Baraita  in  Yer.  and  read  originally  as  follows  : 


What  the  Baraita  wanted  to  say  was  that  half  of  a  division 
came  from  Jericho.  Later,  however  »sn  was  taken  to  mean  a  half  of  the 
twenty-four  nnoya,  and  the  text  was  therefore  changed  to  '*N3  nnntro  l"3 
inn'3  3"»l,  or  as  the  Talmud  has  it  in»T3  pa  a"'- 

"The  letters  when  used  as  numbers  are  not  written  out  in  full. 

"It  is  poor  Hebrew  but  good  Aramaic  to  say  liny  'X  instead  of 
'«  liny,  and  considering  the  fact  that  the  authors  of  the  Talmud  spoke 
Aramaic,  there  is  the  possibility  that  the  Baraita  originally  read 

.ubvrm  liny  'N  ["noyj  1*3 


144  STUDENTS'  ANNUAL 

which  the  commentators28  failed  to  grasp,  we  refer  to  the  follow- 
ing Tannaitic  Derashot.  Sifre  Deut.  240  has  the  following  remark 
on  the  Biblical  verse  Deut.  xxii,  21:  «i>  !>K-iB*3  nbi  nnt?y  <3 
fjKI^  TfkvQ  f>3  *6«  nfclU  inb  n»*y  and  commenting  upon  the 
Biblical  words  fTON  JV3  nns  the  Midrash  Tannaim,  p.  141,  remarks  : 
.Dr6*iJe>  D^ITJ  INI  Dr6  nosr  .13*70  mran  rp3«  rr-3  TTIJM 

By  comparing  the  Tannaitic  statements  with  our  passage  of 
the  Yerushalmi,  one  cannot  fail  to  see  their  identity.  The  first 
Derashah  explains  Deut.  xxii,  21,  fo"W5»3  fto  nnt!>J?  »3 
as  meaning  "She  disgraced  Israel"  and  not  "She  committed  a 
disgrace  in  Israel."  The  immoral  virgin  disgraces  IT  29)  PWJ 
not  only  herself  but  the  entire  nation,  or,  as  Sifre  has  it,  "All  the 
virgins  of  Israel." 

The  second  Derashah.  gives  the  reason  for  the  law  to  have  the 
execution  of  the  immoral  virgin  take  place  at  the  door  of  her 
father's  house.  The  parents,  the  Rabbis  s&j,  are  partly  responsible 
for  the  conduct  of  their  children,  and  therefore  must  share  the 
disgrace  brought  by  the  tatter's  crimes;  in  the  words  of  the 
Yerushalmi:  "Let  the  wicked  children  which  they  have  brought 
up  come  that  the  parents  and  the  children  be  disgraced  together." 

Were  it  not  for  the  unintelligible  K2E?  the  commentators  would 
not  have  gone  astray,  as  the  text  of  the  Yerushalmi  is  quite  clear 
even  •  without  help  from  the  parallel  passages  in  the  Tannaitic 
sources  to  which  we  have  referred  above.  It  is  again  a  misunderstood 
abbreviation  which  caused  all  the  difficulty.  The  Derashah  of  the 
Yerushalmi30  n*3K  IV3  is  found  also  in  Babli  Keiubot  45a, 
and  there  a  Baraita  by  Shila  is  given  as  the  source.  The  full  name 
of  this  Amora,  by  which  he  is  always  called  in  the  Yerushalmi  is 


28  Rabbi  Moses  Margalit  goes  even  so  far  as  to  try  to  connect  this 
passage  of  the  Yer.  with  the  preceding  one!     A  very  clever  but  of  course 
entirely   untenable   explanation   of    xatP    by   R.    Saul   Katzenellenbogen   is 
found  in  R.  Hirsch  Katzenellenbogen's  work  cfny  m2'r)3,  page  120  of  the 
second   edition.     K.    reads    Nae>    S*nt8»=3j3jv,    not    noticing,    however,    that 

hi    "entire  Jacob"  is  absurd! 

29  The  piel  Saa  "to  disgrace"  is  biblical. 

80  In  Sifre  and  Babli,  this  Derashah  is  given  in  connection  with  the  words 
JV3  nne,  while  in  Yer.   it  is  attached  to  !T2N  fi'3  nwtS.     The   differ- 
ence, however,  is  of  no  importance.    Comp.  also  Sifre  D.  235. 


ABBREVIATIONS  IN  THE   JERUSALEM   TALMUD          145 

13  sl)  rtTV.  Now  we  have  the  solution  for  the  puzzling 
in  our  passage.  Yerushalmi32  as  well  as  Babli  have  the  same 
source  for  the  Derashah  'TUX  rpa,  a  Baraita  hy  Shila  bar  Abina 
or,  as  his  name  is  here  abbreviated,  K"2B>  =  xrax  12  r&V- 

V.  Sanhedrin  1, 19a :  ns  rwoo  nnxi  "mx  ^a  (Tn  ruwjna 
/iai  nrn  mi^  1123  ip^ni  rim  . . .  ""SOT  p  pnr  "i  p:o  v"rc6n 
This  passage  most  important  for  the  history  of  ordination  became 
corrupted  in  a  very  early  date  on  account  of  a  misunderstood  abbre- 
viation.  Maimonides33  Yad,  Sanhedrin  IV,  5,  reproduces  this 

81  The  data  concerning  Shila  given  by  the  chronographers  are  confused. 
He  was  a  "pupil-colleague"  isn  ToSn  of  Rab.  We  find  him,  therefore, 
acting  independently  (Y  121a)  of  this  leader  of  Babylonian  Jewry 
in  the  first  half  of  the  third  century  and  at  the  same  time  transmitting 
his  teachings  (Ab.  Z.  22b  and  also  15a,  according  to  the  correct  reading 
of  MS.  M).  He  is  very  probably  ilentical  with  xh'V  '1  Berakot,  Babli 
49b,  Yer.  IV,  8c.  His  death  seems  to  have  taken  place  shortly  after  that 
of ,-Rab;  (247)  comp.  Nid.  36b.  Shilas  Baraitas  (collected  or  transmitted 
by  him?)  are  quoted  in  Babli  as  xS't?  »sn  (Yebam.  24a;  Ket.  44b),  while 
in  Yer.  they  are  introduced  as  ns'3X  13  Nf?1E'  'an  and  it  is  always  R.  Zeira 
who  refers  to  them.  (Gittin  IX,  50b,  Sanhed.  VIII,  20a,  Makkot  II,  31d,  and 
Gittin  II,  44b,  where  MS.  Genizah  in  Yer.  Fragments  reads  nS1B>  13  fJ3»3 
instead  of  n^3N  12  nS'BO-  Rabbi  Shila,  who  was  the  head  of  the  Baby- 
lonian Academy  »no  C»1  at  the  time  of  Rab's  return  from  Palestine,  is 
of  course  not  to  be  confounded  with  Shila  b.  Abbina.  On  the  other  hand 
it  is  quite  probable  that  R.  Shila  mentioned  in  Tosefta  Ber.  II,  10,  Mekilta 
j?D»i  I.  46b  and  Mek  R.  Simon  S.  75  is  no  other  than  the  Babylonian  nno  B"1 
and  it  is  rather  astonishing  that  Halevy  (n'3lB>Xin  niin  II,  224)  did  not 
notice  it. 

82  Here,  as  in  many  other  places  of  the  Yerush.  only  the  name  of  the 
author  is  used  to  introduce  his  statement  without  adding  IDK  or  'an,  which 
is  always  the  case  in  Babli. 

88  The  rest  of  this  paragraph  contains  many  difficulties  but  it  would 
lead  us  too  far  away  from  our  subject  to  discuss  them  here.  It  may 
be  said,  however,  that  Buchler  Synedrion,  p.  163,  errs  when  he  believes 
that  by  reading  in  Yer.  p  n'3  3K  instead  of  p  n'3  we  are  in  a  position 
to  make  Maimonides'  view  agree  with  that  of  the  Yer.  The  main  difficulty 
is  with  the  statement  '131  INB>  bm  for  which  neither  Yer.  nor  Babli  can  be 
cited  as  sources.  R.  D.  B.  Z.  in  his  commentary  ad  loc.,  who  was  the 
first  to  suggest  the  reading  p  n'3  3K  in  the  Yer.  calls  also  attention  to 
the  fact  that  his  reading  does  not  dispose  of  all  the  difficulties  offered  by 
Maimonides.  The  famous  MS.  Trivulzio  of  Maimonides'  Yad  has  not  the 
clause  'i3i  N,T  vhv,  comp.  niin  nawo  ...nixnow  "I3«tr,  Frankfurt,  1889,  R.  Nis- 
Gerundi  to  Sanhedrin  5a,  as  well  as  Albarceloni  nilBBTi  'D  p.  133,  134 
and  R.  Hananel  to  Sanh.  15a,  quote  our  passage  of  the  Yer.  in  different 
readings,  but  none  of  them  agrees  with  that  read  by  Maimonides. 


146  STUDENTS'  ANNUAL 


statement  of  the  Yerushalmi  as  follows  :  IBDJtP  >»  rrn 
HDDJ  DIK  N.T  K^P  irpnm  jptn  ^n^>  1123  ip$>n  D'oam  , 
'131  K'twn  jmtsna  N!>X.  One  is  at  first  inclined  to  assume  that 
Maimonides  had  no  other  reading  in  Yerushalmi  than  ours; 
the  words  |pTn  7?r\~>  are  only  paraphrasing  HTH  JV3.7  of  the  Yeru- 
shalmi. But  it  is  hardly  conceivable  that  this  great  master  of 
thought  and  style  would  have  hit  upon  such  a  poor  paraphrase  of 
the  Talmudic  text.  The  prerogative  of  the  ordination  was  not 
invested  with  the  patriarchate  before  the  time  of  R.  Simon  Ben 
Gamaliel  II,  about  two  centuries  after  Hillel,  and  it  would  be  worse 
than  poor  style  to  describe  this  prerogative  as  one  granted  to  Hillel. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  therefore  that  Maimonides  had  in  his  text 
of  the  Yerushalmi  something  about  Hillel,  and  it  is  pretty  safe 
to  maintain  that  he  read  ^n  rpai>  instead  of  HTH  JV37.  The  dif- 
ference between  Maimonides'  text  of  the  Yerushalmi  and  ours  is 
based  upon  the  different  reading  of  the  abbreviation  n"27,  as  it  might 
stand  as  well  for  P/n  rp37  as  for  ntn  JV3.7.  Maimonides,  as  a  great 
stylist,  only  changed  hbn  iva!>  to  ??n,  because  the  former  expression 
usually  described  the  school  of  Hillel  and  not  his  family.  There 
can  be  no  doubt,  however,  that  Maimonides'  text  of  the  Yerushalmi 
was  corrupt  as  the  expression  ntn  JV3  or  his  Aramaic  equivalent 
KJV3  pnn  is  used  in  many  other  places  to  describe  the  patriarchate 
(comp.  Yarushalmi  Ketubot  I,  25a:  p»»  \™>  84)  nTn  n^  P'° 
rhv  nvnPD  'rm  D'JpT,  Sanhedrin  I,  19d  :  JT^T  Nrr:i  pnm  ;  and 
similarly  Babli  Yoma  78a  nt  ^  IJpTO  n^y»f>  according  to  the 
correct  explanation  by  Rashi).  Another  faulty  reading  of  this 
abbreviation  is  N'twn  nu?  as  R.  Nissim  Gerundi  has  it  in  his  com- 
mentary on  Sanhedrin  5a,  which  is  probably  influenced  by  Babli 
Yoma  78a:  ns'tw  ^  Dn^  tmn  HT  in.  Albarceloni  in  his 
p.  133  JTnt3B>n  ISO  agrees  with  the  reading  of  our  text. 

VI.  Sanhedrin  I,  I9b:  '131  rrrpm  nenna  D^ann^o  no.  The 
text  of  this  passage  cannot  be  correct.  We  know  that  cross  exami- 
nation of  witnesses  nTpm  Win  is  not  limited35  to  cases  involving 


84  So  in  ed.  pr.  in  the  later  editions  "corrected"  to  ]H  M'sS. 

35  Comp.  Sank.  IV.  1.  It  is  true  the  rigid  form  of  cross-examination 
in  money  matters  was  abolished  at  the  end  of  the  Tannaitic  period 
(Sanh.  2b;  32a),  but  our  passage  deals  with  the  old  Biblical  law  and  all 
agree  that  m'pm  ntP'Tia  ni3i»»  'an  niin  121. 


ABBREVIATIONS  IN  THE  JERUSALEM   TALMUD          147 

capital  punishment  niB>QJ  *n  and  there  is  no  sense  in  the  state- 
ment that  the  witnesses  against  a  vicious  animal  which  had  killed 
a  person  must  be  cross-examined  as  if  they  would  testify  in  a  case 
involving  capital  punishment.  Tosefta  Sanhedrin  III,  2,  and 
Mekilta  K.  Simon,  p.  132  read  .TTnil  n^pDl  D^JJl  niTD  no 
instead  of  rrvpm  nB>mi  and  this  is  intelligible.  According  to  the 
Halakah  (Mishnah  Sanhedrin  VI,  4;  Talmud  45,  and  Mekilta 
Bahodesh  III  64a  =  Mekilta  R.  Simon,  p.  97),  the  pushing  down 
from  a  certain  height  n"m  proceeds  the  stoning  proper  and  it  is 
said  here  concerning  the  stoning  of  animals  that  it  is  likewise  to 
be  proceeded  by  pushing  it  down.  The  abbreviation  H"m  =  'm 
was  read  by  some  scribe  as  standing  for  ae)  nTpro  ntJ^TT 
and  to  this  error  the  reading  of  our  Yerushalmi  owes  its  existence. 
VI.  Sanhedrin  IV,  22b :  T«  TOIK  '"">  ...nwOD  'JH  }H^  p'tw  f>3n 
^D3  J"l  ppnpm  The  medieval  authorities  considered  only  the 
Halakic  difficulty  contained  in  the  second  statement  of  R.  Judah 
and  tried  to  explain  it  away.  Comp.  for  instance,  R.  Moses  of 
Coucy37  in  his  legal  compendium  i>n3  m¥D  1DD  Prohibition  148. 
But  it  is  hardly  conceivable  that  the  Baraita  dealing  with  the 
qualifications  of  judges  would  in  the  very  same  breath  give  the  law 
concerning  the  use  of  wine  touched  by  idolaters.38  The  only  plaus- 
ible solution  of  these  difficulties  is  that  the  original  reading  was  J"'l 
which,  however,  on  account  of  the  great  similarity  between  the  two 
letters  ?O^  and  JU,  was  misread  as  J"sl  and  then  explained  as 
*pJ  pi.  R.  Judah,  dealing  with  the  qualifications  of  Judges, 
remarked  that  as  soon  as  one  has  reached  the  age  of  majority  3"^ 
he  is  qualified  to  act  as  judge,  and  we  do  not  take  the  trouble 


88  It  is  quite  possible  that  the  faulty  reading  ni'pm  Wfn  goes  back 
to  the  abbreviation  p"ona  =  p6'j5Dl  n"im  of  Tosefta  and  Mekilta. 

37  Comp.  ntPQ  '3B  ad  loc.  who  refers  to  this  passage  in  the  j"OD. 

88  According  to  the  traditional  interpretation  -pa  J»  is  here  used  in 
the  sense  of  02"  nno.  since  nobody  would  maintain  that  the  prohibition 
against  the  use  of  wine  used  as  libation  to  an  idol  is  not  to  be  observed 
rigidly.  It  is,  however,  very  doubtful  whether  the  old  sources  ever  used  the  term 
•]D3  p  instead  of  03"  cno;  comp.  wn  1BD  ed.  Vienna  p.  39a  and  K.  Nissim 
Gerundi  in  his  commentary  to  Alfasi,  Abodah  Z.  V.  8  If  the  context  would 
permit  the  reading  -p3  ]"=D'3D3  JM  the  most  natural  explanation  of  it 
would  be:  "wine  used  in  the  temple  for  libations."  The  Halakah  main- 
tains that  the  Am-ha-Arez  is  to  be  trusted  concerning  the  purity  of 
D'3D3  )"  (Hag.  Ill,  4)  and  to  this  R.  Judah  might  have  referred. 


148  STUDENTS'  ANNUAL 

PplplD  p«  to  find  out  whether  he  has  reached  his  physical  maturity 
D'JOD  although  the  same  is  an  indispensable  condition  for  complete 
majority.  The  assumption  is  that  ordinarily  one  at  the  age  of 
thirteen  has  reached  his  physical  maturity.  Yerushalmi  Berakot 
VII,  17b,  the  phrase  pps  pplpio  pK  is  used  in  the  very  same 
sense  as  3"^  ppnpio  pN  in  our  passage. 

VIII.  Berakot  I,  3a :  '131  ^SN  D'HOB  n^3N  p  JV^  Xiin  '31  lOK 
This  passage  is  of  special  interest  for  the  history  of  the  Yerushalmi 
text,  as  it  contains  two  readings  of  an  abbreviation,  a  correct  one 
and  a  faulty  one,  following  upon  each  other.     R.  Huna  remarks 
that  the  words  D^fiDS  JiruN   do  not  belong  in  the  Mishna,  other- 
wise the  same  would  contradict  itself  since,  according  to  its  state- 
ment at  the  end  of  Pesachim,  it  is  a  biblical  commandment  to 
eat  the  Paschal  lamb  before  midnight,  while  in  Berakot  it  would 
number  the  Paschal  lamb  under  those  sacrifices  which,  according 
to  biblical  law  might  be  eaten  the  whole  night.     There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  this  is  the  only  permissible39  explanation  of  R.  Huna's 
statement,  and  the  Gaon,  with  proper  critical  insight,  reads  therefor 

D^HDS  n^3K  p  Jvi>  but  without  giving  us  any  explanation  how 
came  into  the  text.  The  answer  to  this  question  is  very 
simple.  The  abbreviation  'BK  was  erroneously  read  by  some  scribe  as 
*°)  l^BK,  while  another  more  learned  one  saw  that  in  this  passage 
it  stands  for  DTID3  rp'3N  and  both  readings  came  into  our  text. 

Although  the  text  of  the  Yerushalmi  suffered  most  at  the  hands 
of  the  scribes,  other  works  did  not  escape  them  entirely.  Even 
the  Mishnah  is  not  free  from  misunderstood  abbreviations,  especially 
the  first  and  the  last  Orders,  the  study  of  which  was  rather  neglected. 

IX.  Mishnah  Demai,  II,  3 :  JV33  swDtwi  ,.,i3n  nrr6  v*?y  $>3pDn 
tjmcn.     The  traditional  explanation  of  the  Mishnah  is  that  the 
Am-ha-Arez  who  wants  to  become  a  Haber  must  take  upon  himself, 
among  other  duties,  also  that  of  "serving  in  the  house  of  study." 


w  To  maintain,  as  some  of  the  commentators  do,  that  according  to 
the  Yer.  the  last  Mishnah  in  Pesahim  speaks  of  the  Rabbinical  prohibition 
against  the  eating  of  the  Paschal  lamb  after  midnight  is  quite  impossible. 
If  this  were  the  case  R.  Huna  would  argue  against  himself,  since  our 
Mishnah  deals  with  sacrifices  which,  according  to  Rabbinical  law,  are  not 
to  be  eaten  after  midnight,  and  we  would  expect  to  have  the  Paschal  lamb 
numbered  among  them. 

*  Ed.  Amsterdam  has  in  our  passage  '»BK= 


ABBREVIATIONS  IN   THE  JERUSALEM   TALMUD          149 

According  to  the  commentators,  "Serving  in  the  house  of  study"  ia 
as  much  as  associate  with  the  scholars  and  try  to  learn  the  Torah 
from  them.  Now,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  Eabbis  attached 
great  importance  to  the  personal  intercourse  with  scholars,  and 
some  among  them  actually  maintained41  that  "he  who  has  studied 
the  Bible  and  the  Mishnah  but  did  not  attend  a  scholar  is  to  be 
regarded  as  an  Am-ha-Arez."  But  the  terms  used  for  the  prac- 
tical study  of  the  Torah  is  D^oan  'Tc6n  E>ne>D  or  mm  *>V  HBnDP 
but  never  Bmon  rp33  WQW  as  in  our  Mishnah,  which  could  have 
only  one  meaning,  and  that  is  attending  as  a  servant  in  the  house  of 
study.  Yet,  nobody  would  seriously  maintain  that  to  become  a 
Haber  one  must  act  as  a  servant  some  time  in  the  Beth-ha-Midrash ! 
Furthermore,  the  commentators  did  not  notice  that  as  the  text  reads 
now  it  would  imply  that  the  Am-ha-Arez  must  take  upon  himself 
the  obligation  not  to  serve  in  the  Beth-ha-Midrash.  The  entire 
paragraph  of  the  Mishnah  is  introduced  by  the  particle  vb 
which  grammatically  includes  also  the  clause  tJmon  rp22  K'OJJ'DI, 
otherwise  the  Mishnah  would  have  said42  K>D&J>D  NiTen,  that  one 
might  be  able  to  distinguish  between  the  negative  and  positive 
parts  of  its  statement.  There  can  therefore  be  no  doubt  that 
Emon  JV3  is  out  of  place  here. 

One  would  be  inclined  to  read  the  abbreviation  »"n3  as 
D!J»n  JV3,  "tax  office,"  which  would  give  it  an  excellent43  sense, 
as  the  Haber  must  under  no  circumstances  become  a  publican. 
The  Mishnah  would  then  contain  the  statement  that  one  desirous 
to  become  a  Haber  is  to  take  upon  himself  the  obligation  never  to 
assist  the  publicans  in  their  work.  But  K'OB'D  is  not  the  word44  one 
expects  in  connection  with  D3DH  TV3,  and  besides  this,  one  looks 
in  this  passage  for  something  about  impurity  as  supplement  to 
KDD'D  *rr  N$>1.  A  1^3.  "attendant  in  a  bath"45  is,  according 


"Comp.  Berakot  47b. 

**Tosefta  Demai  II,  2,  in  enumerating  the  duties  of  the  Haber  has 
correctly  nbv  before  the  negative  and  HR'tin  before  the  positive. 

"Compare  Tosefta  Demai  III  4,  Bekorot  3 la  and  Yer.  Demai  III  23a. 

44  If  we  read  D31DH  there  would  be  no  objection  to  the  use  of  the  word 
PO»Dl,  but  then  we  would  expect   D31D  VQVIl  instead  of  D3ian  fi'23  B>OtPDl. 

45  Here  as  in  many  other  places  the  Greek     ^SoXaveus,    1*73     is  used  and 
it  would  be  in  harmony  with  the  puristic  tendency  of  the  Mishnah  to 
have  for  it  the  Hebrew:       mon  IVM  VQVQ1. 


150  STUDENTS'  ANNUAL 

to  Kiddushin  82a,  excluded  from  holding  certain  offices  on  account 
of  his  despised  occupation,46  and  it  would  not  be  entirely  improb- 
able that  a  pmon  JT33  £>»&?»  could  not  become  a  Hdber.  How- 
ever, this  assumption  is  not  very  likely.  I  think,  therefore,  that 
O"H3  is  to  be  read  as  *7J  nNDIon  rp3,  which  occurs  also  in  another 
part  of  the  Mishnah,  comp.  Nid.  vii,  4.  The  main  obligation  which 
the  Hdber  took  upon  himself  was  to  keep  away  from  any  contact 
•with  impurity,48  and  the  Mishnah  mentions  here  the  two  principal 
forms  of  it,  that  caused  by  a  dead  body49  and  that  caused  by  women 
during  a  certain  period.  The  candidate  for  nnin  was  therefore 
to  promise  not  to  attend  on  anybody  in  rtNDion  JV2,  as  it  would 
be  extremely  difficult  for  him  to  keep  pure  in  such  a  place.60  The 


*  As  the  words  of  the  Baraita  n»t«n  nj?  1J3DJ?  indicate  this  profession 
was  despised  on  account  of  moral  reasons. 

41  Whether  mNQlon  or  rnNOOfi  is  to  be  read  is  doubtful ;  at  all  events  it 
refers  to  the  room  occupied  by  women  during  the  time  of  menstruation. 
The  Falashas  have  still  to-day  a  separate  house — not  room! — for  the  use 
of  impure  women,  which  they  call  M erg em  biet;  comp.  Faitlovich,  Quer 
durch  Abessinien,  p.  152.  Dr.  Slousch  informed  me  that  the  same  is  the 
case  among  the  Jews  in  Tripolis,  Africa.  Comp.  also  Nachmanides  in  his 
commentary  to  Gen.  xxxi,  35.  It  is  not  out  of  place  here  to  call  atten- 
tion to  the  fact  that  the  Septuagints  translates  ma  by  a<£e8pos 
"keeping  aloof."  Comp.  Frankel,  Einfluss  palast,  Exegese  p.  160. 

**  The  view  of  Biichler,  Der  Qalilaische  Am-ha-Arez,  205  ff.  according  to 
which  our  Mishnah  speaks  exclusively  of  a  priestly  Hdber  is  untenable, 
and  a  glance  at  the  standard  commentaries  of  B>"T  and  B>"K")  would  have 
prevented  him  from  this  error.  The  Mishnah,  as  these  authorities  point  out, 
speaks  of  the  impurity  of  the  garments  of  the  Am-ha-arez  but  not  of  that 
of  his  body,  and  therefore  can  only  refer  to  a  Haber  who  is  not  a  priest, 
since  a  priest  becomes  impure  by  touching  the  body  of  the  Am-Tia-Arez; 
comp.  Tos&fot  Hagigah  19b;  catchword  HJO  and  sio  DV  niDDVi  to  Hag.  II,  6. 

"Biichler  1.  c.  failed  to  see  that  D'na1?  NDoSi  in  our  Mishnah  is  not 
to  be  taken  in  an  absolute  sense;  in  case  of  a  msa  no  or  n»3ilp  HNDiB 
even  the  Haber  is  to  defile  himself.  At  least  this  is  the  view  of  Rabbi 
Judah,  who  speaks  here  of  D'naS  KOO^l  in  connection  with  the  Haber; 
comp.  Semahot  iv,  9.  Biichler  refers  to  this  passage,  but  as  he  made  use 
of  the  faulty  text  of  the  editions,  he  reads  jnt?irp  'i  instead  of  mirv  '1 
as  the  MS.  has  it;  compare  Ebel  Rabbathi  ed.  Klotz  p.  58.  Another  error 
of  Biichler  is  it  to  maintain  that  it  was  Akiba  who  declared  the  prohibition 
against  defilement  suspended  in  case  of  nisa  no,  while  his  teacher  R. 
Eliezer,  as  well  as  the  latter's  colleagues  refer  to  it;  comp.  Semahot  iv,  26. 

"The  place  itself  is  not  impure  (comp.  Nid.  1.  c.) 


ABBREVIATIONS  IN  THE  JERUSALEM   TALMUD          151 

scribes  were  familiar  with  the  abbreviation  Q"rt3  =  tJTTDn  IV3 
and  put  it51  therefore  in  our  text  instead  of  nKDIBn  JT3,  for  which  it 
stands.52 

X.  Mishnah  Shebiit  IX,  3 :  "O\  ^33  p^ix  irrp  nviK  'ji  no«  no^i 
The  attempts53  made  by  modem  commentators  to  explain  this 
Mishnah  are  as  successful  as  that  of  the  ancient  ones ;  the  Mishnah 
is  still  unexplained.  But  if  we  read  pt?  instead  of  liTB> 
there  is  no  difficulty  whatever  with  our  text.  The  Mishnah  asks  the 
reason  why  each  of  the  three  divisions  of  the  Holy  Land  is  sub- 
divided in  three  districts  with  reference  to  the  law  of  the  sabbatical 
year.  The  answer  it  gives  is  "Because  they  (the  animals  of  the 
field)  eat  in  each  district  till  the  very  last  food  is  gone."  The 
assumption  is  that  mountain  animals  do  not  migrate  to  the  valley 
and  vice  versa  so  long  as  they  find  something  to  eat  where  they  are 
accustomed  to  live.  Now,  according  to  the  Halakah,  the  time  for 
the  removal  of  the  fruit  of  the  sabatical  year  "rtJO  from  the  houses 
beginrwhen  the  animals  have  ceased  to  look  for  their  food  in  the 
fields.  Granted  the  above  mentioned  supposition  concerning  the 
mode  of  life  of  the  animals,  the  reason  given  in  the  Mishnah  for 
subdividing  each  division  of  the  Holy  Land  in  mountain,  valley 
and  low  land,  is  quite  an  intelligible  one.  Our  text  in'B> 
is  due  to  a  misunderstood  abbreviation;  a  scribe  read  'nB>  as 
instead  of  jnB>,  for  which  it  was  intended. 


61  Berakot,  47b,  makes  the  assumption  very  probable  that  the  Amoraim 
did  not  read  cmon  jva,  otherwise  they  certainly  would  have  referred  to 
our  Mishnah  as  support,  for  the  view  of  ann«  who  maintain  that  one  who 
does  not  attend  "at  a  scholar"  it  is  an  Mam-ha-Ares. 

52  Another  possible  explanation  of  our  Mishnah  is  that  it  speaks  of  a 
nntrnn  n»3=0"w  concerning  which  comp.  Tosefta  Demai  III,  6-7.  It  would 
not  be  impossible  that  according  to  the  Mishnah,  a  Haber  ought  not  to  be  a 
waiter  at  a  festival  of  Am-Ha-Arez,  that  he  may  not  forget  himself  and 
partake  of  their  food.  Of  course  the  Mishnah  could  not  have  spoken  of 
nnwan  JV2  without  describing  it  as  psn  OJ>  bv  nritPBH  JVa,  but  it  is  possible 
that  our  present  text  was  changed  after  o"na  was  understood  to  stand 
for  trnon  rva.  "A  house  of  study  of  the  Am-ha-Arez,"  is  nonsensical  and 
there  was  nothing  left  than  to  eliminate  pun  DJ?  bv  from  the  Mishnah. 

"There  are  more  than  ten  different  explanations  of  our  Mishnah! 


A     000132357 


